Harper is such an old school politician. Say what you have to in order to get elected. Do what you have to in order to stay elected and don’t sweat any intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy in between. In the old days before the Internet and the blogosphere, the public and the MSM would have forgotten such promises. Not any more because everything is searchable and can be monitored…by ordinary citizens.
This time the MSM has followed up and exposes the inconvenient truth about Stephen Harper's political style. Promising in 2004 to eliminate GST on gasoline over $.85 a litre but now it is hovering round $1.28 a litre Harper says there no need to fulfill the prior POLITICAL promise because it would make little difference on overall prices anyway. There was no need to make such a pointless and purposeless political promise in the first place Mr. Harper. Oh, I forgot for a moment, there as an election to win - at all costs, including making disingenuous promises.
The GST tax cut he did promise and make also has little impact on prices or the taxes Canadians pay. With gasoline prices up dramatically and inflation starting up, the 5% GST staying on – my guess is Canadians are paying the same dollar amount of GST at the end of the day anyway.
What a stupid guess and ineffectual economic analysis - my guess is that you have no credentials to such a statement and your conclusion just demonstrates. The government releases how much revenue is brought in from the GST and you simply need to look up the numbers.
ReplyDeleteDion has proposed putting a carbon tax on gasoline - just think how high prices would be if that occurred. Luckily, Canadians will not stand for another liberal tax.
Good point to the previous poster. If you compare the 7% GST on gasoline of $0.85, the GST is $0.0595. On gasoline of $1.20 a litre, the 5% GST takes $0.06. Clearly Harper has kept his promise and extended it to the rest of the goods and services in Canada.
ReplyDeleteWhat's your buddy Joe Clark promising? Oops, he refused to set his coast to coast ego aside to become part of the unified Conservative movement and instead supported the Liberals.
What economic analysis - this post is a political analysis. If you can prove the GST reduction has generated fewer taxes for Canada - show us. My guess is inflation and vendors have jacked prices to take over the 2% GST "cushion" Harper has done as his only promised economic initiative since elected.
ReplyDeleteAlberta has a carbon tax already - since last July actualy - first place in Canada to do it. It is $15 per tonne over a set emission limit put on big emitters and is collecting money already.
Anon @ 11:25: what you conveniently overlooked in your analysis is that gas is now, on average, $1.31 per litre in Canada and shows no sign of dropping. If the pump price of gas is $0.85, 7% GST paid on that gas would actually be $0.0556, and if it was $1.31 (as it is now), 5% GST paid on this amount would be $0.0624 -- a difference of 3/4 of cent. That they are even this close is mere mathematical coincidence, and this gap will only continue to rise. So, no, Harper did not keep this promise.
ReplyDeleteNever mind that the GST is the LAST tax he should have cut in the first place if he was making choices based on making the country a better place instead of, as Ken mentioned, gaining and maintaining power at all costs.
Ok, a political analysis then:
ReplyDeleteThe Conservatives lost the 2004 election, so you should be asking whether Paul Martin kept his promises. Where is the child care program the Liberals promised in that election? Did they keep their promise and decriminalize marijuana? Promise broken.
Harper and the Conservatives documented a new set of promises for the 2005/06 election, which replaced the gas tax cut with 2 point cut on the GST. Promise kept.
Anon @ 12:58 The 2004 election caused a minority government for Paul Martin with the Harper Cons in control.
ReplyDeleteWould Harper have supported deciminalizing weed and expanded state sponsored day care? I don't think so. How can you hold Martin for such issues when Harper had control of the minority Parliament?
Speaking of child care - were are the private sector day care spots Harper promised to have for working families in the 2006 election?
All Harper did was dump a neglected and mediocre child care system in exchange for a $100 taxable grant and no expanded day care system. He said that $100 taxable grant was providing families with a "choice" to have a family memeber stay home to raise kids.
This was not a step in the right direction and is too silly to be taken seriously.
Thx for explaining taht the Harper GST cut was done because he did not want to do a gas tax cut as promised. I did not know that - and I don't believe it either. Got any proof of such a claim?
Ken, how do you explain the carbon tax and its effect on the price of gas???? You are slamming Harper for not cutting the GST on gas prices but actually support Dion's carbon tax would would INCREASE gas prices dramatically.
ReplyDeleteKen, you are spin yourself into disjointed positions but lets call a spade a spade. A Dion-led government would result in higher not lower gas prices. That is the end result and it has already been thoroughly communicated to Canadians. However, the Conservatives must to an even better job during the next election to illustrate to Cdns how much damage a Dion-led government would do. It is simply not worth the risk.
Anon @ 7:28 I actually applauded Harper for not cutting GST on gasoline in an earlier post. Higher gas prices will cause conservation, encourage the development of alternatives and create more public transit use.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of alterantives...
I am working on a project for not for profits in rural Alberta for symmetrical video conferencing to allow folks to get better services, provide better services and not have travel so much to larger centres for services and events. This innovation will bring more capacity to rural communities and expand the capacity they have already. And it reduces time and travel costs like gasoline and accommodations they are forced to pay now. This innovatoin will leave rural folks more time for family and local community building efforts instead of travel time and costs. Cool eh?
We don't know any details on Dion's carbon tax yet or even what the proceeds would be used for. It may provide funds for carbon capture and storage - that is part of what Alberta is doing with its carbon tax proceeds.
Wait for Dion's details before you jump to unfounded and uninformed conclusions about his plan. There will be plenty of time for you to do that even when you will actually know what you are talking about.
Ken, I suppose that is the problem. You cannot some up with an massive tax without any details whatsoever. However, Dion has stated the tax would be used to reduce personal income taxes and, as such, be "tax-neutral" . So, under his 'plan', they will NOT be spending the tax collected on anything else ---- and your suggestions are wrongfounded. IF it is not used to reduce personal taxes, the economy will, quite frankly, grind to a halt.
ReplyDeletePlease, what if what it's used for is to provide easy access to funding for start-up eco-friendly businesses? More businesses starting up isn't typically the sign of an economy grinding to a halt.
ReplyDeleteWhat if it's used to provide rebates on energy efficiency technology for people and corporations. Businesses and people having to spend less money on energy and fuel isn't typically a sign of an economy grinding to a halt.
This whole mantra of "Teh taxes are teh EVUL!!11!" is short-sighted and ignorant. Money that goes to the government doesn't disappear into a black-hole. It gets recirculated from there to other areas as well. Taxes allow money to be pooled where it can be used in such a way that economies of scale can make it worth much more than if it was spent strictly by individuals.
What matters to the economy isn't the tax, but how it's used.